tv U.S. House of Representatives CSPAN June 3, 2010 10:00am-1:00pm EDT
do support, and that is that attention is really paid to turn around and change what is happening to students that are not getting what they need. some of the concerns -- we are concerned about too many competitive it grants to versus former lead-based, because we do not want winners and losers. every state ought to have resources to turn the schools around the not performing in the way they need for students. the calls for the second generation of assessments -- they are not there yet. it will take us two or three years to develop that. what do you do in the interim? the administration, and we agree with them -- these high-stakes tests are not good for kids and not right for education. but in the time to develop new assessments, what do we do in the interim? the testing issue is a big one. the blueprint calls for the same two tests to continue because we
do not have a new one. there has to be another alternative. the other concern is starting with the school improvement, it is a great concept that every state has to deal with turning these schools around, but some of the models we do not believe are the right ones. we really support the transformation model. it takes collaboration between management and school board and employees to state let's work together and reach out to parents and the community and change that. calling for the closing of the school or going to a different one or getting rid of half or all of the staff -- we just don't believe that is the right thing. i grew up in a small town of 1700. you could not close down my school and sent people to a different one, because it was the only one. 30% of the schools or roll, and we want to work with the administration to come up with models that will transform those low-performing schools in the urban, suburban, and the 30% in the rural.
host: we appreciate you being here to tell us about your organizations that use. guest: thank you very much. host: and thank you for being with us this morning. we will be back tomorrow at 7:00 a.m. eastern time. see you then. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] . . >> bp plans to use the giant shares to cut the leaking pipe in the cost. this is live video. the associated press reports
that the top executive says the oil company was on prepared to fight a catastrophic spill and engineers are forced to reconfigure plans. yesterday, a saw was used. we will get a progress report from thad allen in just under 50 minutes, here on c-span. president obama meets with the governor of arizona to talk about the new immigration law of that state. that means is happening at 1:30 p.m. eastern. the governor is expected to comment following the meeting. before that, white house spokesman robert gibbs will brief reporters. that is scheduled to start at 1:00 p.m. eastern. secretary of state hillary clinton is meeting today to
discuss u.s.-india relations. join us later for more from campaign 2010. south carolina is one of the state's looking to elect a new governor. a letter this week, we brought you a debate from the republicans vying for the seat. today, it is the democrats's torn. i said, oh, my god, this president will be impeach. it was says we could never use the word impeachment around this newsroom, lest anyone think we have some kind of agenda. the all of that moment stays with it. >> search for water grant with a c-span's video library -- for
watergate, with c-span2 video library. it is free, on-line. again, here are the live pictures from the gulf of mexico, the oil spill happening there. we will get an update from coast guard commandant thad allen. cried now, from this morning to tell "washington -- from this morning's ""washington journal ,"some calls. even span, you have had gulf of mexico oil coming your ears, eyes, and mouth. been endless coverage. knoit is a critical issue guys have not had aone from the flotilla. last week you did not cover when off. k all we see our israeli clips.
host: there are clips from the side as well. msnbc 45r: i watched i counted how many times y showed the is really click. you need to show the other se of issues. we are all headed to blogospere. need to be more well informed. the other side. st: based on that caller's critique without the appropriate to ask youmorning is what issue currently tops your concerns. let's take a tour of in theg news newspapers and the crop -- and across the country. "the baltimo sun" talks about bracing f oil. "the miami herald" -- we need to protect the state. "the tallahassee democrat" on the gulf coast.
about 10 miles offshore. continng from the front "the times picayune" -- hicks snag. bobby jindal hails federal barrier. in pittsburgh, the oil spill at the top. speech, but the headline, oma defense policies. flotilla attack o front page. israeli p.m. defense flotilla defends -- isrli pm the flotilla attack. and this headline, nuclear not on the table.
a lot of callers suggested putting a nuclear device down in the wells to seal it. today," it the oil spill dominates their. tay," the oil spill dominates there. rises, focus turns on damage. some more fromu few telephone calls. pensacola, florida. thomas on the republican line. caer: i'm a little surprised becoming so thin kins not all, just wanted to call as an opportunity topic before you. got it.
i strongly disagree with that caller. is one ofearly this the worst catastrophes to happen states of america. know where this caller from, but down here nightmare. i actually appreciate c-span with a number of guests think this is the issue. that, you ask what is the concern. thing happened, the is jobs and the economy. anybody with any sense can look around and see the sovereign debt of around the world, re ome, deficits, 18% real unemployment. who hasad any longevity on earth knows this is sustainable and obama does not seem up to the job. host: let us hereext from democrat from portland, maine. what tops yo list of concerns? got the same concerns
gulf.oil spill in the what it is stunning to me is to see the gulf states, which he been extremely republican, often right, me of the anti-environmental politics nation, now suddenly throwing their arms up in the d being so out rage about what the oil companies have done. -- outrage about what the oil companies have de. when legislation comes forward, the people are attacked as tree huggers and now y see everyone back would red neck to the politicians suddenly become environmentalists. say, maybe at is the that will come of this. it is a catastrophe, a shame, e applaudedht to b right in thi people's faces. way it willly change. host: another caller by the name john.
this one calling from pennsylvania, indepennt line. of your list? caller: it is israel. the ramifications of what israel is doing and getting the united states involved or complicity in deal has more global repercussions than the oil spill. would say they a one and one-a. littleas been very flolla, of the r sure. coverage fo heari from the media is israel's viewpoint. a bunch of lies, basically. so, fro a global standpoint and the united states getting inlved in a third world war, is israel. and we just sit back, the
congress approves anything does, and we are making a big, big mistake. host: israel is the lead story in "the new york times" this morning. here is the headline -- itheir lead story today. right below it, they a the of the nuclear optio story. also, the off-lead is on policy in t states. moreion foes did not -- regulations on physicians. this is on the use of broadband. at's announcent that it will tiereerviceng for heaviest users.
study that, a piece -- forealth cost cuts ovstated its upside, critics say. this is from a once obscure group at dartmouth that was cid by the proponents of reform, now law, they say that while the research company outlook hasuth interpreted as showing the coury's best and worst care, dartmouth admitchers themselves it mainly shows the varying cost of care in the states. washington, d.c., republican line. what is your top issue ts mmer caller: i am interested in the immigration law in arizona. nativef tucson and lived there all my li before to the wonderful state of washington, and i experienced immigratione probms in arizona.
friends,number of friends, who are hispac. i know ones that countrye into the legally, as well as other w thatalities that i kno come into the country legally. as a youngirl, my outskirtsved in the tucson, out of the city limits, and we had a little ranch. we would have numerous illegal alns coming across the border. and my dear, swe mama would always give them sandwiches and water because it is a rough area across thborder in that way. i'm very distressed at the way the nation has condemned arizona. you must understand that a lot of the proem with illegal immigration in arizona is
condoning of the small businesses in hiring illegals. i recently have worked for a major tax preparation company cities, and some of my clients were hispanic, and love the all dearly, however, you that two in me false social security cards. and when i asked them about them aid, well, they are from mexi, and i said, where did get your social security card, and they said, i think it was myousins, he lives in california. we use it to get work. there is something might be with our nation that >> we are leading this live programming for coast guard
commandant thad allen for the latest on the spill. he is an metarie louisiana, a suburb of the louisiana. -- a suburb of new orleans. >> good morning. for the first time in a couple of days, i have some good news. we have just cut the ricer -- the riser pipe. they had used a share cutters, which is the one they used to do the other type cut yesterday. the other saw we were attempting to use was not successful. we replace it with the shares. we do have a cut now. the next step is to put the containment cap over what is left of theeriser pipe. we will start to see if we can
move gas and oil up the pipe, hopefully starting to flare off gas, and start production later today. we'll give you updates throughout the day. it is a significant step. the challenge is to seize the containment kept. to differentiate, we are actually going to put a solid steel with a cap, in order to reduce the amount of oil that could potentially week around the connection. it will be challenging. we will have a containment device that will be able to capture more oil than we what otherwise. we will have the option to use under-c dispersants -- undersea dispersants. it will be a significant step forward. i'm pleased to report that. just a couple of updates -- and
i would be glad to answer some questions -- i spent a good deal of time with the suggestion -- with lee said jackson. she has been in the area. she is a tremendous axa -- asset. she has a tremendous relationship with many of the parishes. she has been following the this% issue. i can tell you not epa has been doing water testing and air quality testing. so far, the have no impact on wildlife better if they continue to do that. we will continue to look -- to work closely. we are committed to using as little dispersant as possible. thereby, we would reduce the effect of potential impact on the surface. we know we have used a lot of dispersants. we are approaching the million
gallon mark. every time there is a milestone, there are concerns. will continue to work with this issue closely as we move forward we also announced yesterday that we had approved adding five more segments on their proposal for the corps of engineers as a legitimate means to deal with the oil spill, to keep it from getting into the marshlands of louisiana. i've had several conversations with the governor about the. i will be meeting with him later on today. regarding the current trajectory, the upper edge of the perimeter of the spills, and would call themselves to turn this is a collection, not a monolithic spell -- monolithic spill. we have moved a large number of coast guard assets into the area. in terms a medium endurance
cutters that has the opportunity to do surveillance. we have positioned organic skimming capability. we have a number of controlled .boats we have not been able to conduct skimming operations. we will continue to focus on the mississippi, alabama area. we continue to move boom into alabama. we look at strategies to deal with what they call katrina cut. with that, but i would like to take questions. you always go first. i'm going to go over here. >> cbs news radio. obviously, you have tried caping before. it has not worked.
how hard is it to put a containment cap over this pipe, considering all of the oil coming out? >> prior to the cut, they had suspended the containment cap at the end of the riser pipe, right over the area. it is a matter of moving down and seeing it. you have almost an inverted funnel that is wired. the pipe has a rubber seal around it. i do not want to make this too simple. it is not unlike the rubber seal you would find around a garden hose. they will be doing that for the next couple of hours. yes, ma'am. >> what is the latest on the underwater crews, and have the dispersants [unintelligible]
secondarily, how many skimmer's? >> we will get back to you for the record. there are some in louisiana, some in alabama, some in mississippi. the back to your first question -- we have some extensive discussion with the noaa administrator. we have had some anecdotal reports that have found what they believe to be plumes' under the water. we are in the process of taking samples. we're not sure if it is oil. there has been conjecture about whether the sub-sea dispersants have the oil. we are actually checking the oil
after the dispersants have been applied. they generally make the oil separate, and they would not gather together in a plume. i don't know if there is a causality. there are different water depths to understand what the concentration of oil is at what death. that will be brought together with the data that the -- with the data matter. >> cnn. bp had is running ads saying that will make this right. given everything they have done has felt, how much confidence do you have? >> it is their assertion, and their duty to stand by it. i have not seen the advertisements. i think we need to separate a couple of things. the stuff that has been
happening on the sub sea for our applications of technology that normally work in the oil spill, but have never been tried at 5,000 feet. the issue is trying to do things where there is no human access at 5,000 feet. that is pretty much what has been happening. they do have a duty. they are irresponsible party. we are overseeing them, and we are doing very aggressively. >> to have the status report of a relief well -- a second relief well? are the resources focused on the second relief well? >> they are, and i are both on target for a release. based on what the ndp knows, -- what bp knows, they are slightly
ahead of schedule. we look at an update. we're not willing to declare victory until the really -- told on -- until the relief wells are actually connected. regarding the deep driller two, when it was been deployed, and we thought there was an opportunity to cap the well, we knew a blowout preventer was an option. they actually deployed a block preventer. they went out and started a second relief well. when they started the top kill, they thought it might be able to stabilize the mud. they were prepared to put another blowout preventer on top. it stopped at that time, moved over, and is ready to deploy
the but prevent her if it was needed. they are on schedule. >> why did the saw failed banks >> -- fail? >> we do not know exactly why it failed. if you have ever tried to saw the limb of a tree, if you have pressure against it, it is wobbling around. the pipe was not stable enough. they tried it for several hours. at some point, they said it would not be successful and went to the second option. >> were there any containment%+ efforts -- [unintelligible] is that a concern with the
bidding cap -- a looser fitting cap? >> i called it looser-fitting, but it is really tight. the natural gas that isn't part of the hydrocarbons is in part of the sea water. that causes the containment device to get bored and start to float away. -- to get buoyant and start to float away. there are going to put floats in the top of them. once that kevin is in place, they will also be putting in -- once that pipe -- once that cap is in place, they will put in the measures. >> [unintelligible] what does that tell you about the rest as we enter the hurricane season? >> we have to stop them.
and there is not only lightning, but whether does rich collector that does not allow us to operate safely. we are always going to have to deal with weather. it is a huge factor. there are days where we can basically not do anything because the state of the sea will not allow what. as it moves into hurricane season, until the relief well is done, we will be at some risk exposure to whether, even if it does not a hurricane. -- even if it is not a hurricane. we are working with british petroleum and a series of alternatives that might make the alternatives more survivable. you can stay on station longer, in heavier weather. at some point, we might face the
possibility that we would have to stop the containment operation and get the resources off for safety purposes. at that point, we will have an oil being discharged. they're looking at systems to mitigate that. vessels are not on stations. >> allen johnson. kurdish petroleum said they were -- british petroleum said they were looking at a leaven alternatives. has that been completed? you said that epa has sanctioned the use, but what is the result of the discussion between bp and the government for alternatives? >> the correction is allowed for
use under the approval of theepa epa for the spartans. -- for dispersants. this is not a closed issue. it remains under discussion. it is a tough issue. this material is available. it is effective. we are concerned about the total amount that has been deployed and the impact of them at that depth. we did not have a lot of information. right now, a legitimate alternative has not surfaced. epa continues to review it. that is where we are at. let me take one more. >> there was concern that once the pipe was sheared off, there would be an increase in the flow
of oil. are you saying that, and is it near the 20% figure we have been hearing? >> will put that out later. he will try to get some information. the estimate from all our flow rate technology group is that they would estimate that if that were the case, that it could be up to 20% more. we do not know that that is the case. i will say this as one final comment. bp has done a couple of things that i think demonstrates good faith. number one is the number of video scenes. they are offering briefs on the operations going on. with that, we can go to the cost per >> operator, we're ready for questions from the phone -- with
that, we can go to the calls. >> operator, we are ready for questions from the phone. >> the first question comes from baltimore. >> i have two questions. on the terminology, you called this top hat, but this is-with the smaller cap that has a seal on it? second, with the ongoing operation, and the lowering of the cap, and the jagged part off the plate, will you give us an update when and if that happens >> we will, we will absolutely do that. it is a little confusing. the first system was followed by
the development of about five others that very incapacity regarding to how low ebb and why do they are, the kind of seals they have, and killing the choke lines. the current one they are looking at -- if you took one step back from having the best we could get, that is what they are looking at. it has a rubber seal. allows them to go over and the regular play. it is not exactly -- it allows plate. it will not be exactly a perpendicular fit. given the type of cotton have right now, this is the cost containment tapped to be used -- given the kind of cut they have right now, this is the best containment tapped to be used.
>> the next question comes from susan baker. >> this is susan baker with dow jones. since the diamond sheer cut did not work, will this essentially make the spill wars in the short term? >> it will not make the still worse in the short term. no matter what kind of cut we would have made, there was a potential to increase the number of hydrocarbons coming out by about 20%. that was an estimate based on the fact of the king to holding back. that is one issued. since it is not a perfect sealed, there is a chance some oil could escape. when you are dealing with these rubber seals, there is a chance the pressure of the oil going up
to the pipe will be more than what the type could tolerate. we intend -- what type could tolerate. pn -- what is the plight could tolerate. we are going to try to get the best fit we can. next question. >> your line is open. >> i think that might be me. i have a question. you mentioned sub-seeded spartans. i have been reading on the epa website that they have not been tested. the spartans, i believe, cost the -- dispersants, i believe,
cost the oil to sink. bp is denying the there are plumes. >> when we are talking about sub-seeded spartans, we're talking about the same that are being used on the surface. we do not know thh effects of a plane dispersants on the oil that is rising up from the pipes -- if we do not know the effect of applying this curtains on the oil that is rising up from the pipes. it is not causing oil to sink. it breaks up in smaller pieces. as the oil rises, after the spartans have been applied, what is the fate of the oil? that s what the current water testing and know what is still in will be able to tell us. >> her next question comes from natalie.
-- your next question comes from natalie. >> i like to know if you have any comments on the special cnn had left plant with the chemist with her thoughts on the severity of the spartans. >> i am not familiar with the special is in question occurred high with a glad to have my press assistant get back to you with an answer -- terry and her i am glad to have of the press assistant get back to you with an answer. >> my question is -- use said a while ago that you trust tony hayward and you rephrase that in talking about your responsibility.
the president said that it is in bp's interest to misinform the public and the government about things that could effect its financial bottom line. what steps have you taken specifically to prevent bp from misinforming view, the incident commander? >> this horse hitches this word comes up a lot. there are a lot of ways -- this word comes up a lot. there are a lot of ways to discuss trust. my expectation is they will do what i asked her if they comply with the request, and they are responsive, i do not know how you characterize that.
if it is trust, a partnership, there was a need to corporately proceed forward. the request we have made to british petroleum for live video feeds, technical briefings, plans is the shared with top kill, f time i have asked for those that have been given formate. there have been issues with logistical coordination, ordering of a boom, and how fast that it gets there. i do not know how to state it more clearly. when i deal frankly and openly, i get an answer. when asked for action, it is taken. >> less questions. -- last question. >> hello. i am with bloomberg news. i had a few questions. a moralist pressing thing goes
back to the issued -- the most pressing thing goes back to the whale that could push out of the rubber seal. i'm curious to how much oil you seen leaking out. what are the scientists seeing? we knew that heading into the riser pipe could cause a 20% increase in flow. what kind of a percentage increase, or what kind of percentage to the scene not been trapped in this cap? >> it will capture the oil being brought up by the pressure in the reservoir that is down below. we know the pressure is somewhere around 9000 psi. the pressure reading indicated that the blocker venter was around -- the blowout preventer
was around 3500 psi. there was pressure for the oil to come up in the pipe, and rise up to be produced, and flared off. the question is, will the pressure of the oil going up in a much smaller pie, if they completely -- a much smaller pipe, if they completely fill up, which would force it oil around the oil seals? the answer is, we do not know until we see how the containment cap is sealed. we have some video that tells us how much oil is coming out. which could be lucky, and it could be close to non-farming. -- and it could be close to none in the. we will have the video. we will talk openly and frankly
about it with me know. thank you. >> thank you, everybody. >> admiral thad allen in the matter early, -- in metarie, a suburb of new orleans. will go into the scenes. the next step is to cap the well. the white house is also announcing that president obama will travel by to the gulf coast tomorrow. we will have more details later in the day. he associated press is writing that emergency crews have been working on booms. oil from the well has already found some 125 by those of the louisiana coast line. -- miles of louisiana coast line. the governor of arizona is expected to talk with reporters
after meeting with president obama about immigration. to try to bring that to you live. before that, white house spokesman robert gibbs will brief reporters. secretary of state clinton is counterpart. her indian live coverage starting at 1:00 p.m. eastern time, on c-span2. south carolina is one of the stairs looking to the left a new governor. -- when of the state's looking to elect a new governor. we brought to the republican debate, and today we will have the democrats. >> c-span, our public affairs content is available on television, radio and online. you can also connect with us on twitter, facebook, and u2. sign up for our special alert e-
mails at c-span.org. >> more on the oil spill with brian o'neill. on your screen is a gentleman by the namef brian o'neal. he is someone whoas snt 21 years of his profeional life representing 32,000 alaskan fisherman and natives in theiruest for damages and repneumonia rion from the exxon valdez oil spill what lessons can we learn from that experience to apply t what's happeng in the gulf today? >> well, the first thing you if you'reoing to extract and transport oil, there's going to be catastrophic spills, and that's because people are in charge of the extraction and transportation of oil. the second thing is where the , nobody knows.
in the case of the valdez, everyby thought the oil would go southeast, and it goes rthwest. and it went a tremendous e of about istanc the lengthf theewest coast of e unit states. the oil goes, you on't know. whatt does, youon't know. its impact on different kinds beaches, its impact on marsh lands and differe creatures are all unknown. for example, in alaska. in alaska oil impacted fishing seasons for about three yea, but five or six or seven years after the spill it became a rnte oil had decimated, forever, a herring in prince william'sound. so the impact of l on creatures and ecosystem sincere a big unknown. its impact on businesses. on fisherman businesses and hotel businses is an unknown.
you don't know how long the oil is going to last o what its impact isoing to be on your busine. in order to figure that out, a number of ait because the impacts of an oil spill are odd. and it also has odd impacts on communities. if a community is a resource-bas community, fishing is a good example, and there is a man-made dister, like, bp or like exxon. people take it very hard, and they tend not to get over the unt they get their full measure of justice. so you see, in coastal commuents inlaska that were ll, the to the spi increased rates of alcoholism, epression. divorce, bankruptcy. x proble.
and even 21 years after the spill today, if you were to go into a coffee shop or a bar in an outstate town in south central alaska, it's as if the spill happened yesterday. so the intacts are widespread. you can't tell what they are going to be now. and you can't even tell where the oil is going to go now. st: as we get started here, remind miami we have statistics from television in anchorage to remind us of the size and zope estimated 10.8 million gallons spilled covering 11,000 square piles, and anstimate of the number of animals killed by that spill include 250,000 to half a million sea birds, 1,000 otters, 300 harbor seals, 250 balanced eaglls, billions of samen and herring eggs and 22
orca whales. let's move to the traject roy of the legal history, because helped stet stage about what might proceed here and how what happens here might effect it. the spill was in 1989 in prince williams' sound and by 1981 -- 1991 they had settled claims. five years later, civil case baker versus exxon an alaska jury awarded $5 billion to 3 the,000 fishermen. december,wo a u.s. appeals court reduced those damages to $4 billion, exxon appeals and the court raises it to $4. 5. damages cut to $2.5 billion and june of 2008 thenited states squort got involved ruleing the civil damages would be limitted $507 million. let's start with that final
figure of the supreme court ruling. hat mean for the 32,000 defendants and the plaintiffs in the case. how much did they get in the end? total amot that the plaintiffs got was about $1.3 billion. that included $500 million worth of interest. because it took them 21 years to wage this war against the exxon corporation. and it was a long and costly war. we spent over $200 million in time and $30 milli in cash. over 2 is years and i think f xon probably spent north o $100 million litigateing the matter. ome away usions i c with are if you litigate with big o company, they can spend enough money to make you bleed through the years. and the second conclusion is justice is a long ways away. we've lost upwards of 20% of
.ur clients they are dead. and many others les are in dis array, andhis money would d to put them back in play. and the money would have prided them with a sense of justice. understand where ey on would have that had mon o defend self. where did you get the money to prosecute the case? >> the lawyers takeover years -- the lawyers, over the years, contributed th the hopes that in the end we would win. so for 21 years we were living on our credit cards. ost: and would you do it again? ptive to your ru life. it's disruptive to your professional life. it's very narrowing to work on one matter for 21 years. but you're going to law school this was my one chance to make the world a
better place. o your question is, yes. ost: with the arrival of the al on the scene this week, anticipating of course, bp's parts that there will be all sorts of damages sauth, perhaps even crimin es, what are you observing to -- observing bp too to position themselves for criminal charges >> i don think they are ing no such position themselves. they make contribery statements and qualified statements. by qualified statements i mean well, we'll pay all legitimate claims. think think you just saywe'll knows it's legitimate claims. i thi bp is n in as much trouble as people think it is reasons.ple of even ough attorney general andhe state attoey generals are saying we're going to prosecute or
take at the prosecution of bp and sue it for natural resources. weaw it in alaska and it took two years for exxon to come to cap and me to negotiateuated goverent. e government doesn't have the ability to fight it and i don't think the govement does. d there's a stra t.j. i can element to -- i'm not sure anyone would want to do anything to drupt bp no matter what bp did. anthe third thing is unless a business man actually stls money om people, there's always been reluctantens in the court system and by prosecuters to put a white businessman in a suit in jail. so the criminal stuff i don't know wheee it's going too. the civil stuff, that is
n around hotel owners suing bp for damage sincere in all likelihood going 20-year nuclear war, and i think people ought to get used to that thought and hunker down. >> whenal all the dust settled how much money went into the mockets of an individual sherman the case of 21 years waiting. an estimate? >> if you owned your own boit and permit about $60,000 $65,000. if you were a deck hand on a boat, $10,000, $8,000. host: and do you have a ? action to that abard -- to that award. to that award? guest: i was shocked when the supreme court took the punive 28. away in and so were my clients, and the amount of money my clients got to make them
whole and t enough to giv them think sense again that jits was done. host: well folks, you have heard brian o'neal and heard of his 21-year legal saga being involved, on bhaffs of many of tens of thousands of the exxon valdez spill, we would like to hear your questions or commens as relate tos gulf of mexico oil spill. very anxious to hear your questions or comments on lessons learned and if you'd like more detail about what happened in the exxon valdez legal prosecution. let's begin with a telephone call from texas. this is rick on the democrats line. good morning. caller: good morning to you. host: yes, sir, your questions
comments? callerone comment is i grew up in southeast, louisiana. for then you have what they call bum rushes which isn't but ma they call kane. and there's actually no actl ottom. and that will never be cln. there's no way -- that was one of the biggest places, bass, and everything grow. and i'm going toive you an example of the oil companies. i gw up in an area of venezuela called the wagon wheel held up by texo started the year i was born. and that area has been destroyed. there are pits every where. where they lost things and they sue them i'm guessing
color to -- and y can go out there today and can't even catch the fish because they have sores and you can't eat them because they actually , so if anybody thinks big oil is going to do his, they are t totally out of their mind. thank you. host: your reaction to the long-term effec of oil spills. agree with what he sd and he captured an awful lot of the truth. on all of thesen the mississippi dealta. i've heard 25%o 50% of all the wetlands in the united o be are going t devastating. it's going to have impact on things we have no idea relies on the mississippi delta. and you can't clean oil up there. once it gets in there. it kills what's there, and the
world's the less for it. host: lakewood, california, danny, independent line. caller: thank god for c-span. i love c-span. ow i was wondering what environmental laws can actlly be enforced right now mple? and like in instances of in -- like in imminent domain, can the government just come in and take over bp's operation and profit and take full control just to get thing done? ank you. guest: there are twouestions. the first is wt environmental play?ome into e psecuted under the refuse act passed in 1989 which prohibits putting things in e water. act passed tt err 2 and the migratory bird treaty act. but again, i don't think those are going to have much impact
on b.p. at all. because i think the gernment m out cheaply. the state governments may have similar laws but i don't think got to thes have the resources to fight with bp. e second part of the question was can the government take over bp right now and essentially attempt to stop the continuing spewing of oil from the bottom of the snoge ion't think they can take over bp. ethink they can federalizehe response to the spill completely ithey want to and try stop it themselves, but the problem is the government doesn't know how to stop an i'll spill, and bp doesn't know how to stop an oil spill either, which is kind of inresting, because we made deal with bp and ewith made a e the people's oil.
that oil doesn't belongo bp. ground. he the deal is you can come in and oil and make 's so much money that the wealt is incredibl but in the return, you provide it to us d in a safe manner and a manner in which if you hurt people, you pay them for their hurt. they didn't go it in a safe manner, and i >> next telephone call is fro irving kentucky. good morning, gary. you're on the air. caller: yes. thanks for having me on, and i've aays been a big c-span fan. i would like to ask mr. o'neal e whole thing about the drilling, like, this far down, it seems to me the whole thing is, li, premeditated to a nse that they had no plan
when all this -- when the oil started to flow, to clean this . ss it started with the compensaon and two, mr. o'neal, what's the milary g about this orre they doing anything at automatic? -- at all? host: can you help t caller? guest: yes. i have a couple of observations. first is the caller makes a very good point. engineer how can figure out hoto go down a mile under the ocean an extract oil. but that's a huge tech in a .ogical challenge but they figured out how to extract which i the second part of the challenge, ty never really addreed, because
mile down int the water requires technology th apparently we don't have. you would think if they were that, they would ouple more years until theyere able to tpwhilled enough redunden as i nto the built mechanisms so that we would be safe. part of the reason is our fault. and that is the demand for oil is so huge that commanies are o o and take chances with our safety in r to feed our appetite for oil. but the it's their fault, because they shouldn't be doing unless they know how to shut it off. so that's the first part of the call's comment. the military is involved in so far as the coast gard is involved. and i've always been of the view, and i'm especially of the vy now that the coast guard is too co with the industry. you see press conferences and
you think about what you'v seen in the last couple of weeks is they are like brothers togethe in this ting thing. the regulatory arm of the government, the m.m.f., the coast guard, those who were safety to ensure our were asleep at the wheel. but they are always asleep at the wheel. end of comment. host:ctuay, without cessarily a comment, in the financial times this morning there was among its many stories among aspects of the oil spill there was this one written, just wted to share it with the you had a yeps, oil major is now forced to tack al public rellings disaster and s.re's what it say on tupes evening, the executive dinner in a new restaurant with thad allen when they were inrrupted by james carval. the legendary democrat and
n introduced, ee mr. hayward and carval spent the next 20 minutes symptoms sometimes heatedly agreing to disagree about the nature of the operation to contain the disaster threatening to ruin latter's native louiana and two the two then agreed to meet again in the same ext year, this time n it was terse but poll light to mr. carval and gave my skept criticism to what he was promising. tarted off talking tenant uncertainties of oil pills. there is a certainty t an oil spill, though in that once the oil is spilled, you really can't clean it up. exxon spent $2 billion. in its cleanup activities and cleaned up anywhere between 8%
and 12% of the oil it spilled which i find an astounding procedure. they had the advantage of rock beaches and the advantages relatively contained area in prince william sound, although the oil eventually escaped and goes a the way to the alaska peninsula. here the mess is bigger. it's more oil. it's the gulf of mexico, which huge body of wate and you don't have theuxury of stone-covered beaches. sort of shell-covered beaches. it's going to be in swamps. it's going to be in all kinds of marsh lands and wetlands and on sandy beaches and you can't pick it up with skimmers. effectively you can't boom it all off. real interesting proposal i've seen with with gards of save the wetlands is the state of louisiana to build these sand -- out out of
promise. but history teaches us once the oil is spilled, you're not picking it up. host: remember canne line you're on for brian o'neal. caller: hello? hi. i read something the other day, jay pepper asked o'bama at some press conference that there was some 17 countries that offered to help with the cleup and bama only accepted mexico's help and norway -- other countries had started to help ngs, why would we not accept any help t start cleaning this up? or is it even possible to start vacuuming some oil before it eading any further? guest: well, aouple of . mments
first of all, you can't just go out there and vacuum up the oil. some of it is under water. some of it is in a high-energy environment. and it covs such a huge area, that it's sort of like throwing of a athe side football stadium. so that's the first problem. but you do need to try. and if i was in crge, i would accept all the hel iou get. iind the prospect bheak. once -- bleak. once it's spilled, is spilled. host: you thought there w too cozy a relationship between the oil companies and it' been read about military corruption. slain explain the law. domericans have any recourse agnst agencies enjoined with
otecting them where there ruption or mismanagement? >> the answer to the question . no as a general proposition, the agencies areharged by law and their answerle to the president, and they are not in any lal sense, answerable to s. host: good morning. rock -- given exxon valdes was essentially not held accountible for anything, and bp's mess will be me of the same, nd the magnitude of these environmental crimes, wouldn't history suggest an armed overthrow of some of these corporations and let their accountability with government wl be --
guest: think of observation on the commencht. d that is in the valdes case whe the supreme court comes e end anddbasical bails out exxon, it causes ordinary folk, fisrmen, me, native alambingens, to lose their faith in the -- alaskans to lose their faith in the justice system of america. so the trackfrom the goodwill that ourovernmental institutions have, it takes away from their litimacy when the court system comes in and a big player. an exxon or a bp. and thais not healthy for america. hostwhat was the preiling argume with the majority of
baker versus exxon? guest: the prevailing argument was that t award was just too big. host: on what ground? guest: that it was just too big. host: what constant conitute that? rounds for guest: well it said in big oil spills the ratio is going to be e-to-one for compensatories but that i go e, no 250 years of anglo sacksen injuriesrunes. yoknow there's a court y find in the bible and english common law and they come t america. they are part of the law at the time of the revolution. and they have been with us in all other aspects of the common law since the signing of the republic. it is the first time anyone's -- and the justification,
opinion, the he n essentially is we think it's too big. and we're making it up as we o. hostlet me tell you a little bit more about brian o'neal, in addition to long legal career, he served from 1969 to 1979 in the u.s. army obtaining f captain and then served as the stapt to the general council to the epartment of the army. he's joiningtous talk about work of 21 years and representing plaintiff -- as the gulf gushecontinues. thiss a call from al on our democrats' lin caller: thank you. it's a beautiful day. .
centrists, i would interted to know who he the three centrist but not split between centrists and rightists. between rightists progressives, and want centrist -- one centers to seems toogo one way or the other. with respect to the o is bill eampai -- the oil skill, on th that is central as losses,tion for the creating the losses, is not the government bearing a astn amount of culpability well, since they had in place a theyto print the oil and available -- burn oil and they had no boons
available. not best for the is bettert, but it than the disrsants. th respect to the government takeover of the industry, how do that under the constitution? can you talk about of the rising to federal government opposed goverent -- federalinth o thenment as opposed t state government to do anything? d more government jobs. we need less government jo in the private sector. we tpayers are furnishing all to theney for nothing banking industry's who are not just as the fed doing theiris not -- just asborders notfederal government i their job at the rders. host: we are moving beyond the oil spill. burning the oil? guest: y cannot burn that much oil.
booms -- there are not enough in e world for a spill this size. with regard to the split on the court, it is very interesting. the caller made an intesting point. however, in this case, roberts conservatives the o changed the wh law. e judicial activists in and changed to water to a year's worth of anglo-saxon oil, --ail out an changed 250 years worth of law to bailout and oil company. federalizing the spill does not mean federalizing bp. it means pushing bp asidend the and trying to fix problems. issue tre, though, is that government has no expertise all with regard to stopping the skin of the planet, and it appears bp
doesn't either. host: would you hope to be in any litigation bp?nst guest: i don't know whether i'm e involved yet. who asks meend on of that the scope is.oyment spent 21 years reprenting fishermen and natives, i might find it to thatk intge business. -- might fd it backartbreaking to get business. regard to a state or federal agey, iight be interested. host: wouldo it expanded why you might find it too hard braking? -- would you expandn why you find itoo hard braking? guest: the fishing business is no like a guy sitting on the dock. the
family often works in business, and friends work business. wh you undertake a representation, you are assuming fixing theirfor problems. a lot of lawyers say you are not, but you are. it, andears, we work on friends and i worked on this thin, and we tried the case for year, we go to the appeals court ti after time ime, only to have it away by the political court. go back to the clients and "i'm sorry, i d not fix problem, i did no bring you the justice that i thought i you."bring that is one aspect of it. now, the other aspect -- host: bill ahead, ease. guest: it is hard to work on one
thing r 21 years. host: just for your own pressional concentration and development. guest:es, it is. how would you like to cover one story for 21 years? it would drive you nuts. host: with the cyclical nature washington, we do come back things regularly. it is interesting. brianxt caller for o'ill, who is with us for 21 minutes. caller: there is no reason why folks in our government who were negligent, who knew doi, should not in prison. d be awaitinghoul trial. i might also add that membersf being lobbied by sure that there ot a relief well built at
the same time. in canada, when they build one wells, they have to relief well at the same me. the congress people knew very well what is happeni, and if any monetary ties, they eld civilly resible. what finally might solve this is horrible prospect othis l drifting to south and america and them is suing us because we owned the lees, we are the landlords. could sue us,hat might an end to this. these folk should be in prison just fixingd not rison -- not go to toxing henchmen to go prison. guest: i agree with the sentimen everything the said. going toee anybody is just thee it they want.t they should, but they won't.
the oil is gng to impact other countries. going to hit cuba, hit mexico, the east coast of florida, and therwill be lawsuits. the loss of mexico and cuba ll be resolved under -- the lawsuits of mexico and cuba will be resolved law is goingtional have some impact on bp, but r weahere t n oil is impacted in any way. exxon and bp have a special retionship with all t govements of the world they provide oil and oil runs the world. mentioned caller canada. "the globe and mail," which itself canada's nacional
as a story on offshore drilling. drilling will continue off record thatt disaster grows, -- at record depths. as the disaster grows, canada's oil drilling faces scrutiny. independent line. good morning, caller are you there? caller: yes, i am. gentlemanen this fine roof of to figure out proof ofll knew -- we all knew would be the of the major oil spill. the damage caused by it will be redressed. live with it forever. two, there will be no justice this fascist ours.ment of
salvation right now is spill. the this still could be stopped and it could be stopped by our military. is a nine-inch diameter hol in it solid rocket that hole included -- nine-inch- diameter hole in solid bed rock. that hole to bemploded and plucked. bring inwaiting to feed 15,000 into bedrock so that th can bottom ofll at the the dead rock. is our only hope. if this country ever needed a now, and now right is the time for its. the people would back them up. they need to take back h
turned government and this country back to the people. host: any comments for that caller? guest: yes, i do have a and it is that it did t take me 21 years to learn system would not provide justice. i thought it would when i thought it would when school, wn i school, whenm law start this in 1989. thought in the end that the system would give alaskans the full measure of .tice,nd it did not with regar to the military and t, i just don't know. diego. repuican line. caller: mr. o'neill, tnk you service. well, the caller basically took question. military plug the hole?
i heard a couple of days into military had t possibility of imploding it and it, and that bp would not have the opportunity to rein drill, and they would lose of dollars. you can see from the appearance ceo that it just goes to the ignance of the that it just goes to prove this was just about money. not allow any outside, contractors in, because they wanted to save the we. do you think this will back up to be be? -- do you think this will bp?rupt i heard they went back or $1 a are yterday. how is that? gues two good questions. bankrupthk itill bp.
bp, in an average year, their be $5illionwould or $6 billion a year. the other thing you have tt is how oil companies profits isr different. awful lot of money countries and in the united states they get oil depletion allowances. goi toit is them.pt think the federal , unfortunately, would to back up to them, because they provide oil, and r universe -- oil out universe. -- i haveuestion forgotten e second question. host: it was related to how their stock at gone up yesterday. srted in 1 when we trial, theaadez down.stock was
on september 16 of 1994, when we got a $5 billion rdict against exxon, the stock went up, and stock has gone up since then, because $5 llion, what the supreme court says, was nothing to exxon. the stock is not aretty consistently since then. -- thed have bought gonep pret since then. i should of bought stock that trial.the cannot bring myself to do it. host: did you change your consumption habits guest: yes. a guy with a lot of cylinders, and i don't anymore. i think the only long-term resolution of this problem i tucked cut down on -- i to cut on our energy consumption. we can all do that. host: brian o'neill has been
minneapolis this morning. sharia talking about his role as - we haveattorney his role asbout attorney in the case of valdez,z, the askan >> right now you are looking at live pictures from under the sea as engineers continue working on at the oil spill in the gulf of mexico. earlier today, bp used as a giant share to cut the leaking oil pipe. the associated press is reporting that bp's top executive is saying that the oil company was unprepared to abide by catastrophic deepwater oil spill and that the engineers are forced to reconfigure their plans to control the leak rid the plan today is to put a giant
tap on the oil spill and pump the oil to a ship. you can read about the oil still on our website, c-span.org. president obama is meeting with arizona's gov. jan brewer today to talk about the state's immigration law. that meeting is supposed to get under way at 1:30 eastern and the governor's supposed to comment after the meeting. right about the same time, white house spokesman robert gibbs will be briefing reporters. that is scheduled to start at 1:30 eastern. secretary of state clinton is meeting with her counterpart from india today. the two leaders will discuss u.s.-india relations. we will have live coverage of those remarks starting at 1:15 eastern on our companion network, c-span2.
join us later for more campaign 2010 information and events. south carolina is one of the state's looking to elect a new governor. earlier this week, we brought you a debate among the republicans are vying for the seat. today is the democrats' turn. that gets under way at 7:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. this said, oh, my god, t president is going to be in each. -- impeached. woodward said we can never use that word around this news and, lest anyone think we have some kind of agenda. but the all of that moment stays with me -- awe of that moment stays with me. >> watch woodward and bernstein from earlier in the year and see what other key players say about the cover-up.
export c-span video free online. >> a discussion on how the state department is utilizing new technologies to improve diplomacy. the speaker focuses on technology and innovation as a member of the planning department. it is about an hour and 10 minutes. >> are you ready? good morning. good morning. the excitement of the day is upon us. anyone who is standing, we have plenty of seats up front. it is a classic problem in this room. nobody wants to sit up here. good morning. i'm the managing director of ogilvy washington. welcome to this morning's
ogletree exchange. today we look forward to discussion of technology, social media, and the intersection with american diplomacy. there is perhaps no one better than the obama administration or all of government to express these themes and issues that the secretary of state for hillary clinton's policy planning staff. he was kept on to serve the obama administration with secretary clinton did counter- radicalization, public diplomacy -- he serves on counterterrorism, counter- radicalization, a public diplomacy, and youth issues. he has become a specialist in the use of technology to advance american interests throughout the world, particularly in the middle east and south asia. in december 2008, he assembled the first ever alliance of youth movement, a summit of the 21st
century movements that rely almost entirely on technology to affect change. he brought google ceo eric schmidt on what was the first trip to iraq by any american ceo. during june of 2009, he intervened to keep the twitter network on-line, delaying scheeuled engineering work so that supporters of the iranian opposition candidate could continue using the network to organize their activities. in december of 2009, cnn released its top 10 internet moments of the decade, of which was included the launch of facebook, the introduction of the iphone, the 2008 presidential campaign, and the google ipo.
in his spare time, he is an established author and as recently published two books. he received a b.a. from stanford m.phility and ihis from oxford, where he studied as a rhodes scholar. he will speak for 20 minutes and then take questions from all of us. [applause] >> thank you for having me this morning. it is a great way to start the day. the question of how technology ships of foreign policy is one that only becomes more interesting every single day. secretary clinton, in various remarks, has described foreign policy along three basic pillars -- defense, diplomacy, development. if you look at the first of those, defense, there is a long tradition and institutional station of integration of technologies and foreign policies. it is everything from the
internet, which others can talk at great length about that i can, to traditional technology. with regards to the other two, diplomacy and development, the integration of diplomacy and foreign policy has largely been based on how we communicate messages, advocate a policy, a little bit of dabbling in the open government space. but it has largely been restricted to how we engage in a message and communicate. at the end of last administration and in particular with this administration, we are seeking to broaden that. technology is a tool with broad applicability across foreign policy. let me begin by giving you the theory of the case and in the but of a sense of how i, this from personal experiences, and then give you examples of what we in the administration are actually doing. i argue that connective technologies are the most disruptive innovations we have seen since the innovation of the printing press.
5 billion cell phones on the wall, when 0.7 billion people connected to the internet, -- 1.7 billion people connected to the internet, the spring up a whole new set of challenges, as well as taking into account a new set of stakeholders that can be engaged and power of leverage or countered depending on who they are and what they look like. this is very significant. the notion that technology is shaking things up is not necessarily a new phenomenon. the notion that technology is empowering citizens are on the world for either good or bad is not a new phenomenon. i mentioned the printing press, but also the radio and television. i would argue ttat none of these three technologies were particularly revolutionary, because each one that i mentioned -- printing press, radio, television -- all required intermediaries. if you are a citizen, to access content and be part of the distribution of content, to be able to engage with this they call those who are producing at content, -- engage with stakeholders who are producing
that content, there is an intermediary required rid the country at a greater ability to control the intermediaries and the impact of the technologies. with regard to connected technologies, at cell phones and internet and cell phones that are internet-capable, we are witnessing something that is truly revolutionary. the platforms become the intermediary, rather than just the people. people can be influenced by blocking and censoring, but they cannot be fully controlled less north korea allows a in in the first place. new media that connects people of the people and entities, social media, and a whole other aspect, protecting people but financial resources, banking, education, a distance learning, medicine, health, telemedicine, and so on. technology is not only become a tool with greater utility as a
means for and power and, but it is also the technology that we see today that is really the finest example in history of empowerment that does not require an intermediary. let me sort of give you a sense of where i come at this, because there is a very important3 with, which is that it is significant with -- as in the the as these technologies are, as disruptive as these technologies are, the technologies themselves did not choose sides. peoppe do. this is something that secretary clinton said in her freedom speech. how do we influence, how do we grapple with this, how do we deal with the cost benefit analysis of leveraging or distancing ourselves from certain types of technologies? let me begin by giving you two anecdotes that shape how i think about this. the first one is a collection of photographs i took in afghanistan, from february 2009.
the photographs are from -- i was there roughly about three months rougafter a prison riot was orchestrated, utilizing cell phones to organize attacks on three of the ministries in and outside kabul. inmates had been able to smuggle cell phones in and use them to orchestrate a tax on the outside. that is actually a frightening scenario and of itself. when i went to prison, i was told by the local prison guard that day at fixed problem and that cell phones were no longer making it into the prisons, and that they understood the significance and it was not an issue anymore. they pulled out one of the ringleaders, a gentleman up here, and asked if i would like to sit down and talk to him. i did not think he would tell me anything particularly interesting, but i wanted to meet with him, so after the course of an hour of speaking, i
could ask him one final question at thh end. my motivation, before i tell you the question i asked him, was in the prison where the riots took place, i walked around and found these notebooks and cell phone numbers and the militant black book of who knows what stakeholder is out there. i found his connections on the ground where they had taken it cell phones and radios and devices used for probably something nefarious. at the end of the composition, i asked him if i could have the cell phone number -- at the a end of the conversation, i asked him if i could have the cell phone number. about his iphone and gave me the number. -- he pulled out his iphone and gave me the number. [laughter] it is an example of how many hostile actors are highly innovative and those who seek to cause us harm, and those that want to protect from harm, are
increasingly becoming sophisticated and utilizing these technologies, as well as circumventing efforts to stop them from using these technologies. let me break in your day and a bit and tell you another story your day a little bit and tell you another story. something happened on my trip there that shakeout i think of technology on the positive side. i was in one of iran's busy cities, and there was an intersection of one of four five different alleyways. i saw something fascinating, young people leaning against the wall tapping away on their cell phones. it was announced in a country where 60% of the country is under 30 -- it was not unusual in a country where 60% of the country is under 33 but to see so many kids being anti-social, tapping on their cell phones against the walls, warranted or questions. i asked someone what he was doing.
he said, "recruiting and new band." for migy i asked another one, he said, "trying to get a date." most things were frivolous and what people would reject as non- substantive i said, i don't understand, if you are trying to recruit a new basis for where the party is, and you just sitting here -- bassist or where the party is, and you are just sitting here texting -- -- it was in the middle of winter. they were using bluetooth. i always regarded bluetooth as the greedy yuppies were you taught yourself. -- creepy earpiece where you talk to yourself. there were not familiar with the earpiece aspect of bluetooth. are to be so lucky that in our ability to speak freely, we can
hold the steering wheel with both hands and not get a ticket in the process? there is a different set of challenges day afte -- different set of challenges they have. the guy was trying to figure out where thh party wasn't just taxing anybody who showed up on his blue -- and was just texting anybody who showed up on is bluetooth. show of hands, who would do that? creepy. no one would do that here. go to your university campus and do that, and you will be the top of the town, and not in a good way. i said, you are doing this just out of public, it almoss belligerently asking people what is going on, and aren't you worried about getting caught? and they all crowded around and said, and nobody over 30 knows
what bluetooth is. it is a significant generation gap. how the younger generation uses technology and how older generation uses technology. that was the first significant take away. the second significant take away was that when i came back to the u.s., i started telling these stories, and people said, so what? they are organizing to go to underground parties where they get out all and dance was to music and in means absolutely nothing -- where they get out the hot gas to western music and it means absolutely nothing. but take out the substance or lack of substance in but they are doing and that the tactics -- and look at the tactics. because of a frivolous motivations, they were learning how to do things that they are not allowed to do. fast-forward to 2009 or a later period, and the same tactics, when faced with an opportunity, become quite useful in other settings. it is something useful in june
of 2009 where people used technology to hold the government account -- all the government to account and galvanize and organize. i started talking to people who have been at the forefront of bluetooth technology -- people at motorola and ibm. what i told a story, they said, it can be used for that? those at the forefront of bloo uetooth technology did not appreciate not what they're innovation was for the free and open market, but how the technology whitby utilize innovatively -- how the technology would be utilized innovatively. they had no idea that there would be an application called farmville, and that people spend money in real time assimilating farm activity on top of their -- simulating farm activity on top
of the facebook network. the people at facebook did not anticipate that either. i assume everybody in here as cellular phones and a black. some k -- blackberry of some kind by show of hands, how many of you have read the instruction manual? two people. this is basic freedoms that you have. you do not need to read the instruction manual. you do not need to know how bluetooth can be utilized to call and text strangers. one, you don't have the time to do it. two, e don't have the reason to %+ it. go to a place with a sensor environment, and all the sudden you will read that instruct -- uncensored environment, and all the senate will read that instruction -- a censored
environment, and all of a sudden you will receive that instruction that -- you will read that instruction manual five times over. --n the platform is treated created, they have to shut it down, which governments are not able to do for more than a very short period of time. this is more the kind of optimistic side of it. i am not detect -- not a techno utopian, but i am a techno pragmatists. let me tell you what that is, because i just started using it a couple of weeks ago. it is accepting the fund and the the reality that is not creating the internet -- the fundamental
reality that this is not creating the internet, but the reality is that whether we like it or not, from a policy standpoint, microsoft, google, facebook, all of these different companies are putting these tools out on the public domain. it is not a -- it is just the nature of commerce in the 21st century market. from the government's standpoint, we have two options but we can fear that we cannot control and thus not try to influence it. if we don't try to influence it, it just gives greater space and room to a hostile actors who seek to use technology for nefarious purposes. or we can recognize that the 21st century is a terrible time to be a control freak. we can better influence it, versus went cellphone and attrition was 85% and internet penetration was 60%. we can bring it under the auspices of education and substantive activities i had
taken a trip to a province in northwestern afghanistan in march of 2009. i saw something remarkable. the province, which borders with iran, as more cellular towers and electricity to worse than any other part of afghanistan -- and electricity towers than any other part of afghanistan. there was a charity, and the afghanistan neighbors found utility of bragging taxes on their terms. -- bringing the access on their terms. i put to that as an important case study. during the cold war, i remember walking in for cassette tapes. we did not want to take advantage of this technology or go anywhere near it, because we felt that increasing the utility of this technology as a living as a net positive, even though there were certain cost to it, was not worth the risks. there was a collection of
private sector companies innovating with cassette tapes, and we backed away. not only did the soviets use cassette tapes to propagate communist ideology that we so feared through central asia and elsewhere, but the unintended consequences. had it not been for the cassette tape, it would have been very unlikely for ayatollah khamenei to achieve the kind of notoriety that would have allowed him to come back with such fanfare in 1979. that is an important historic case. when i say i am a techno pragmatist, what i mean by that is that these technologies are out there and they are shaking things up in ways that are good and bad. from a foreign policy standpoint, there is no better time or opportunity to engage in that now. this generation gap exists, and there is a high amount of energy on the part of the private sector wanting to understand how technology can be utilized or are being utilized, and in this unique moment of time, we
have five to seven to 10 years to really embrace this space. this is veryymuch what the debate looks like secretary clinton is a huge proponent of leveraging innovation, on blocking the power of technology, tools of connection technology. neither she nor the administration is so naive to think that there is not a certain risk that comes with engaging in this space. we are entering into a foreign policy that takes into account these technologies and leverages these technologies, but not without full consideration for what they actually do. that is going to be us to make a calculation that the technology that is out there -- that is not going to be as to make the calculation that the technology that is out there is something to ignore. it is new technology for us. it is a huge reason and motivation behind bringing an entirely new sets of stablers that have not been part of a foreign policy before. -- entirely new sets of stakeholders that have not been part of foreign policy before.
i will tell you how this is playing out based on the techno pragmatist conclusion. unless you never had the technology and the first place, there are few cement walls thaa exist. you have your blocked sites, but that is not a cement wall. that is a poor as well. today what you have is, again, with the exception of north korea, a series of a porous wall street some are more so than others. -- a series of porous walls. more -- some are more so than others.
many in silicon valley cannot imagine how the tools they create will be used innovatively. it was not until the berlin wall came down that we really saw flooding of ngo ostensible society organizations into the eastern bloc --. ngos and civil society organizations into the eastern bloc. it could be a company that is entirely come exclusively focused on making money and not on the mission. that could be entirely with thhir focus is. still, they are treating to is that to be utilized as a tool for and power and come -- they a that could beols utilized as tools for in powerpoint, for good or bad. it is to be that it's also cited was -- civil society was ngos.
with the fire walls, use of the least prevalence of organized opposition to -- and dissent use the leastaw prevalence of organized opposition and dissent. now anybody with a cellular phone and be and empowered citizen, for good or bad. it can be an act of terror or holding the government to account and promoting transparency. i keep mentioning the positive side an initiative that side, because part of our job from the far -- a policy positive side and negative side, because part of our job from the foreign policy standpoint, 21st century statecraft is as much about building connections as it is about negotiation. one of the things we tried to do is identify old and new challenges and bring in a multifaceted said of stakeholders. experts on the tools, experts on the issue, a government, who
could be an honest broker that can connect them all, and extract value from a set stakeholders that are not used to engage in with each other. i want to give you a little historical background about where this all began. i can pinpoint you the exact date that, at least in my four years working in government, 2.5 in the previous administration and the years in the new administration, where technology made it on to the mat outside of defense and to additional communication and policy advocacy. -- traditional communication and policy advocacy. then-deputy secretary of state condoleezza rice had read in "the wall street journal" about these massive protests in columbia and how something about how facebook and skype were utilized. this is the time when there are calling it -- they were calling
it myface instead of facebook, and there was confusion about -- there was not a study about how to was being utilized would make a positive impact. i asked to be put in touch with the people making these protests. there were millions around will protesting against the -- around the world protesting against the farc. at the embassy came back and less,it was a leader -- spontaneous. i sought on to mike facebook accounts and at one of our -- in terms i signed on to mike facebook account and had one of our interns figure this out, and we found this group that had about six of the members of it. -- 6000 members of it.
i assumed that the leader was a civil society activist who had been funded by a variety of the u.s. government grantees, or non-u s government grantees, well educated. i sent a message and said that i wanted to come out to columbia and meet you. his response was, "really? why?" i said, i want to know how you did this. "really?" i flew down to columbia. he had never been to the u.s. embassy before or anybody in government. he was an unemployed engineer. he had another job in several years. he had lived in that tiny studio apartment. he woke up one day and decided that a particular kidnapping that happens was just too much,
and he came up with a simple slogan, something easy for people to get their head around. i ask him,, did you do it? he started building the organization -- how did you do it? he started building the organization, before the protest -- started building the organization a month before the protest. i thought he must have gotten some special training. he did not. he said that anybody who joins would be made an officer. city leaders, municipal leaders, pr team, and then it grew to hundreds of thousands. his group had more employees than at&t. the word of mouth networks remain the primary tool forcible side organizing. -- for civil society
organization. they built a constitution, supreme court, even an appeals court. it was the most sophisticated ngo i had seen in my entire life. people said that it was not an ngo. it had a url, office, a paid staff, and it is open source platforms instead of the various societies that and that out. >> hand it -- that hand it out. can a viral video be and ngo, 10 a facebook group be -- can a facebook group be an ngo? you have a whole new order of civil society stakeholders that would not exist without the
technology. the first fascinating thing that i was told was how he did it. the second most fascinating thing was that the day after he did it -- i went down a couple of months afterwards, and the day after he did it, they started getting messages from venezuela and iran and china wanting to know how they did it. there was this net positiie. when people talk about, for instance, iran, all of these people used technology to go to the streets and did not do anything, the election results remained the same. p would argue that it was a to benefit, a huge victory in terms of -- a huge benefit and victory in terms of what happened. people can put a whole bunch of best practices and challenges on the public domain that are
being troubleshooted and utilize around the world. that to me is a net positive. we should also look at a new point of 21st century civil society as something where the innovation of one can be utilized by another, where the truth -- or the troubleshooting of one can be utilized by many. i thought it was so cool, he built his gigantic organization, and there came the skeptics. they said, well, how do we know it was the technology that did this? let us start with the impact of the protests themselves. we saw the biggest demobilization and desertion of the farc in its 40-year history. the struggles that the colombians have been having against violent extremism, said stablers, is far more than a -- what same set stakeholders, is
far more than what we have experienced since 9/11. all these people fighting in the jungle with the farc, until they saw their compatriots in colombia and around the world, they thought they were on the winning side. people were still skeptical. it does not answer the question of technology -- maybe they use the protests, but is technology really behind it? .
>> it is not like these people had background. it was a random group of unlikely leaders. i would argue that we now -- we call them on likely because we don't typically view them as leaders. they are the more common later than the more traditional ones. we do not necessarily acknowledge them as the modern- day leaders because they do not fit our historical context. but they are. what is the symbiotic relationship between the traditional leaders and the nontraditional leaders? he tried to build an organization, a traditional organization and it failed.
he did not know how to do it. the 21st century leaders understand technology and how to organize movements around an event. i would argue that still the traditional types of organizations and movements should be at the epicenter of+ civil society because they are the ones that are trained and understand the issues and will emerge as future leaders of the country. i would argue that they cannot do it alone in the 21st century. the traditional set of civil society organizations and ngo's have this background but they'd need a 21st century kick in the ass. they need to be more effective and amplify what they are doing. one thing we work to do is to connect in a better way of civil society. let me give you another example. the man who was killed in the
midst of the protest in iran in 2009, i don't know who captured the video of him being killed on their cell phone. i know nothing. about a could the individual was to cut this video out there. let's start with what we do know. within hours, this video made it onto the desk of the most powerful and least accessible people on the planet, heads of state, president, you name it. some of the most private powerful people in the world. this video galvanized the world around that issue. i don't think anybody would dispute the fact that this video made it on the street to some of the least accessible people on the planet and people started to change their rhetoric. we sought leaders start to
change their rhetoric. -- we saw leaders start to change their rhetoric. it was like the entire world was standing outside their offices waiting to hear what they would say. this video had a natural global policy impact in terms of leaders around the world responding to it. they condemned the act of violence let's take the video- capable cell phone out of the equation. what with the word know about this person. with heads of state beat commenting on her within hours? people feel compelled to respond at this moment. would there be this global outcry? you would've had a bunch of ngo's that would have been under scrutiny to recount what they saw.
ask yourself the question, without video capable cell phones, would this incident have the kind of impact it would have otherwise? let's go to a different example, haiti. the interesting thing about that is the earthquake happened january 13, 2010. in november of 2009, i took a few executives from silicon valley to iraq and the purpose was to look at lessons learned on how technology could have been utilized early on in the in barack, we did not anticipate -- in iraq, we did not anticipate cell phone would advance quicker than land lines. that would have been a better thing to understand earlier.
we became aware of a variety of conclusions as to how technology can play a constructive role in construction. i would never have made a connection at what we're looking at there and what we were looking at in haiti until the earthquake happened. i led a task force to look at technology in the aftermath of the earthquake. the first thing is i got in touch with our ambassador in indonesia to ask if there any lessons learned from the tsunami in terms of how technology could have been utilized. he gave me a bunch of ideas. i looked at my notes from my trip to baghdad. post-conflict reconstruction and -ppost-disaster reconstruction looks similar. preservation of law and order i3 important, giving aid organizations the ability to communicate on the ground is important. we had all these prescriptions
from a couple of months ago. we started to utilize this in haiti. we started to get the telecommunications up and running because eight organizations were pulling bodies out of the rubble and doing the immediate work needed to coordinate with each other. does not that telecommunications was taking away from the immediate task, telecommunications and technology empowered them to do it more effectively. we know that the text campaign raised $35 million entirely by text donations to the red cross. that was the first week. afghanistan is one of my favorite case studies. i will end with this one even though there are more examples. afghanistan is the only country in the world where police officers are receiving their salaries over cell phones.
that is remarkable to me. i am a believer in looking into places that face the greatest challenges. how is it that in a country where 97% of the population does not have access to a bank account and 1% of the population as the internet and roughly 30% as access to cell phones, it is the only country in the world that is giving police officers their salaries over cell phones. why were the cell phone towers getting blown up in kendo are? no one was protecting. >> . them. they had to deliver salaries when the cell phone towers got blown up. the cell phone companies thought
they could get the salaries to them instantaneously. it could not happen throogh formal banking systems so they adopted a system adopted in kenya which is a mobile money transfer program which allowed people to cash out and literally could have -- and literally people could have bank accounts. police officers were not getting their salaries. they've realized it was because a number of them were aliterate so they incorporated a voice- activated system. holbrook's office has been at the forefront of promoting this. they identify projects like this. they make them known to other parts of the fall -- foreign policy apparatus. we are looking at building at a
similar platform in the condo. this is so the congolese army can be paid. then they can have have a greater impact protecting women who are getting oppressed in the condo. go. nobody raised their hand in afghanistan and said to do this. it was an innovation that arose out of necessity. when the kenyan program was started, they did not noted it could be used for this in a place like afghanistan. their cell phone towers were not threatened. let me leave you with one final point and we'll go to questions and answers. from a state standpoint, state craft is as much about building connections as doing negotiations for the u.s. government has one set of tools. we are probably the greatest
matchmaker in the world. we need 21st century tools and we are not shy about saying we are not the experts on innovation. people in private sector companies are experts. several organizations are experts. -- several organizations are experts. we want to put the expertise in one room. --civil renovations are the experts. we want as many experts in the your challenges. troubleshoot that is very much how we are thinking about the 21st century technology. [applause] why don't you start? >> i work at google and my
question for you -- first of all, thank you. i have never taken so many notes in so short amount of time. you mentioned that the technologies that enable all of this are personal affects and do not require any intermediaries like a printing press. let me disagree and the following sense. there is an intermediary that links those personal technologies to everyone else and that is the internet service providers for the mobile phone carriers. they become a target in some sense of government concern and maybe even control and intervention. i would like to hear a little bit more about what you think about that potential bottleneck. >> i think that is a valid point. i don't disagree with that. in the free and open world where there is no censorship, this is less of an issue. it is an issue when we engage
technology companies as a new stakeholder in our foreign policy. companies have to balance between all involved or not they want to be with foreign-policy. ngo's make the same calculations. technology companies are increasingly taking on ngoesque characteristics. some are willing to work with us and some are not some are willing to work in certain countries that is the same at. private sector companies. from our standpoint, companies are putting out very useful and contentious tolls on the public domain. we would be crazy not to engage them to learn more about how these tools are utilized. we also want to leverage them to produce net positive outcomes.
sometimes the conversation results in something and sunset -- sometimes it doesn't. u.s. is not in the business of telling companies what to do at least from the state department cited on the regulation side, if they violate laws, that is a different story. we are in the business of haaing conversations and facilitating conversations and partnering when possible. with regard to international companies, this is a much more difficult issue. in countries where there is a lot of censorship or countries where there is greater concern about these technologies anteater the government or non- state actors can cause harm, the companies themselves are under great risk. the tools they innovate are being used for good and not for bad and that is the reality they are forced to contend with. that is the same thing we are forced to contend with.
they wonder how it can be a net positive but how can they make money and not have hostile actors go after company offices or get shot down. they have shareholders and a board and a business to run. that is a different set of calculations. they are working through this on a case by case basis. i cannot give you a definitive answer. some companies are willing to do this in some countries more than others. it depends on the personalities, as well. some are willing to take greater risks than others. it depends. i will often say things that are controversial which is that no one gets arrested for blogging, but people get arrested for dissent.
these are the same trends and phenomenon that private-sector companies have to grapple with. >> i'm a professor of internet studies at georgetown and i have been working with the institute of the study of diplomacy on the broad question of high diplomacy. we are looking at how diplomats use technology and how we can foster people to people communications on facebook and the like. have you identified other countries who are moving aggressively in this area? are there organisms the -- order organizations you look to? >> this is the next phase of this. my colleague and i have grappled with this.
my colleague is the first senior adviser for innovation we ever had at the state department. it is a tremendous creation in terms of having someone be in leadership and being able to drive the leadership and innovation. he is uniquely positioned in this new role to have conversations with ministers and allies around the world. that is government to government diplomatic track for the u.s. is not the only public- technological innovator around the world. russia is on to some of the best software engineers and technological innovation and the world. during the cold war, if we innovated, a can of the expense of them and vice versa. when we look at the official policy of resetting relations between the u.s. and russia, we would argue that there is a mix of technology and innovation. that is probably our best shared
resource. we are having conversations with the russians under the auspices of a bilateral innovation be utilized to empower settle society to address health, anti- trafficking, and it is leading to a vibrant conversations and initiative. india is here now for a strategic dialogue. there are few countries bleeding in innovation as india is. it is not just our technology companies. platforms can be beneficial to civil society . their platforms can be useful tools we can use in the united states and the tools that we innovate separately or together can be useful tools weekend use together in terms of pushing them up globally. the short answer is, this is phase two.
we are a start up in the foreign-policy apparatus. we have moved from the metaphorical grosz to small offices on university avenue in palo alto but we are still a pre-ipo company. there is a lot of work to do. question in the back? >> i work with technology companies in washington. this is a follow-up question. most of your commentary and most of the public discussion has been about public diplomacy, the impact of civil society and the public on these new technologies. can you talk about the impact of these networking technologies on traditional diplomacy, both within the u.s. diplomatic
bureaucracy, the diplomatic progress in other countries, and the diplomatic bureaucracies of international organizations? have these technologies had an impact on traditional context of diplomacy? >> one of the most important technologies to hit the u.s. state department in termsu5i of perranent efficiency are black berries. when the incident happened in honduras maybe six or seven months ago, one thing we saw early on was that everybody in the negotiation on both sides had blackberries. our assistance secretary of state observed that this created a remarkable amount of efficiency because people could speak definitively and get real- time answers and it led to an honest and efficient negotiation.
i keep hearing this. every time there is a critical negotiation or critical juncture that involves multiple stakeholders who are not administer or presidential levels, these blackberries are an incredible link to the nervous system of respective governments that allow negotiations to take place in a remarkable way. that is sort of obvious. blackberries have only entered into the state department really on the last couple of years. this is a really remarkable thing. before that, we had cell phones and we had thoughts where we had to log in to computers. that is the best example i can give you. we have many great people at the state department in the diplomacy portion to figure out how to use these technologies on
foreign policy but also how we can make -- work better and more efficient. we are seeing a lot of interest we have definitely seen the same thing. other countries have experienced the same sort of blackberry phenomenon. everybody is dumbfounded we did not have this a couple of years ago and how much easier this is and how many disasters could have been divertaverted. even countries where the relationship oscillates between very friendly, friendly, and turbulent, this is actually a conversation that is very easy to have with just about any stakeholder. this affects even countries that center their internet. this provides an opening to talk about things. under the auspices of the conversations about technology,
you can have discussions about human rights and other things. i say that technology is a carrot and a stick. there are very few countries that do not want an investment in their country. there are few countries that do not want things to be more efficient and work better. for that they need technology stakeholders. one virtue of having technology stakeholders is to increasingly find ways to get them to take up their commercial hat and put on diplomatic hats. we talk about track to put diplomacy where we are state -- non-stakeholders to face new challenges. track 2.0 diplomacy can bring together stakeholders for one purpose but result in deeper conversations than just the commercial value of these technologies. back there. >> i am working on the u.k.
election. they have invested a lot of resources in the u.k. how the rate the resources within the state department on technologies and highlighting the work of what you do? >> you cannot go from 0 to 60. let's look at the question of senior officials blogging and using technology more. is it being affected? it is all cumulative. everybody is learning from everyone else and figuring out how to get more twitter
followers and use more social networking. three years ago, you cannot have had a conversation with anybody about doing this at an embassy level. you could not have that conversation. now, just about every ambassador and embassy is on facebook or twitter and ending -- and entering face to to figure out how to use a more effectively. they are using these tools that are out there. we can go back to what i said at the beginning -- the part of all this is the during out how we leverage these technologies as a tool to communicate and get our senior officials out there. that is extremely important. that is only one slice of the pie. technology is a tool that should be a part of everything we do. there is literally not a single foreign policy challenge that technology cannot be used in
some way, shape, or form to address. while it is important to focus on the part we all get, it is also important not to neglect the parts we struggle to understand. >> i am with the family online safety institute. you have not mentioned china this morning. at the recent u.s.-china internet forum in san francisco, a few of us were there. there was a complaint that we are getting blocked and censored by you guys and the chinese were talking here and saying that we provide us with 70% of the pornography in debating the children's minds and police stopped it. -- and please, stop it. >> those are conversations that would not have happened a few years ago. secretary clinton did something remarkable in january of this year. she elevated internet freedom to
be a major foreign-policy aspect. this has never been given that kind of attention at this level before. part of the reason she did it was that over the past year or two from iran to moldova to egypt and vietnam, she was watching activists take their advocacy for human rights and democracy and civic empowerment from traditional grounds and taken into cyberspace. if cyberspace is merely an extension of the traditional society and not a strange place where bad things happen to good people, it means that our policies that govern how we protect and engaged and empower the traditional set of stakeholders and it -- in the traditional run should be extended into cyberspace.
that was a bold move. that had a tremendous impact in terms of allocating that is cheaper when the secretary of state delivers a major policy address, that means that is on the table. conversations about internet freedom with a variety of stakeholders which have taken place before are taking place. there is no way to hide the fact that he elevated the issue and did so very comfortably in an effective manner. before you can have a conversation lead to the kind of 60 miles per hour out comes, the conversations have to take place in the first place. her elevating this issue has brought out of the woodwork a variety of staplers that did not know if this was something that was important. many solutions will come from engineers that do not care about human rights, necessarily. they care a lot about coding and never thought about protecting human rights but they saw something onntv and that struck a nerve and all the sudden they are coding anti-pornography
technology. we are much more comfortable talking about this now. that is a new paradigm shift. wherever people around the world stay politically motivated -- secretary clinton said to we will look for opportunities that are working to help them sarcoma -- circumvent that. that is rooted in the same policy that govern how we protect human rights activists. i would argue that we are making progress every day. we are not just having conversations government to government bought the conversations are becoming stakeholder conversations and very public. ppivate sector companies are beginning to see their share of responsibility. many of them are grappling with these issues. theee is a pressure for companies to think about the
impact that their policies have on the well-being of individuals in a variety of countries. is important not to single out china. -- it is important not to single out china. this happened with all the global-china phenomenon. we looked at that as an opportunity to take the media interest and have a global conversation. we don't have a policy toward one country or another. we have a global internet policy. we support efforts to get around politically motivated censorshhp globally. these are not country-specific. when the media was upset with the issue of google and china, it provided -- provided an issue to talk about the girl in saudi arabia by her father in an honor killing. was an opportunity to talk about activists around the world who
are facing harsh critique or repercussions because they are speaking their mind. we have to remember that it is broader than one country or one company. >> i am with freedom house. you mentioned earlier that according to the government getting different actors together, what are your thoughts on the roleeof the government to make sure there will be a framework for creating technology that will not get abused in the future? is there a role for open technology that can be more easily shake or changed somehow as opposed to closed technology? >> i don't have a clear answer for you because these are things we are still thinking about.
there is a prioritization of the internet freedom that is less than one year old. we hear things like this in these kind of forms which are the most highly prescriptive opportunities for us. there is really an opportunity where i do not get something out of these kind of meetings that results in a conversation at foggy bottom. this is a difficult balance. based on the innovation gaps i mentioned before, i believe in putting tools in the hands of people and giving them the ability to utilize those tools and and looking for opportunities to train and so forth. i don't think we are well- positioned to tell people how to utilize those technologies. at the end of the day, depending on the environment and challenges, individuals are the best -- are in the best position to troubleshoot. we can create networks.
of entities and individuals who can help local populations troubleshoot those challenges. i don't think that populations certain countries will get their best ideas on how to circumvent censorship or how to balance the open and close from washington. i think they will get it from people who are experts on the technology and the local context. there is a lot of focus we need to have on empower local entities. in terms of closed vs. open, we believe we're much more inclined towards the open. we are increasingly having conversations with private sector companies about how we should think about these issues and how we can create more free and open societies. over here. >> you said earlier there was no
better time than now to integrate these technologies with diplomacy. you talked about the generation gap and the innovation gap. what are the primary challenges in working with people on either side of that gap? >> part of the challenge is that 60% of the world is under the age of 30. the democratic we understand all is the most fickle and are the first socialist in these technologies. we need to understand the world's largest demographic and how to utilize these technologies. i would argue but no one understands young people better than they understand themselves. we're looking for opportunities to bring more young people into the fall. secretary clinton announced an interesting program that is called the virtual student foreign service program where we recognize that many embassies would like to do more engagement with young people.
they would like to be more forward thinking on how to utilize technologies but they do not have the staff for it or the infrastructure. they might not have the expertise. we figured maybe we could have our best talent from the united states who are young and know how to use these technologies support our embassies remotely. we literally had our embassies promote in turn chips. a number of our embassies of around the world are receiving the services of young people who are acting as dorm room diplomats rather than going out to one or another and helping our embassies think through how to do this. we have somebody in the midwest who is working as a virtual student intern for our embassy in baghdad. we cannot go 0260 but we are trying to get creative on how we engage and empower young people in this country. one thing that i say hen i
speak in a university environment, when i was in college not that long ago, it many of these technologies were just popping up in meaningful ways on the international stage. when people ask me what i wanted to our focus on, i would say i did not know how i would be an expert in china or the arab- israeli conflict every young person now is an innate expert on these technologies by virtue of the fact that the use them as opposed to older generations. that is an incredible resource that needs to be harnessed. every private sector company is a defacto think tank on technology innovation and how it can be applied to foreign policy. they don't need to know the immediate answer but they need to raise their hand and asked to be involved. the state department will help extract relevant value around challenges we face from a
variety of different stakeholders' that did not necessarily realize they have a relevant role to play. >> i am from the sun -- center for global development. baker and out ways to make budget -- figuring out ways to make budget, the u.s. could make a better example in the state department and the usid as to showing how this can be done. maybe they could change the thirir diplomacy and allow peope to go on-line a look at a map and see where money is going to their country. i am wondering if that shift in the role of the state department is a generational divide that you run into people not just willing to putting a budget on
line but making it opened. it would be putting budgets on line with open standards. >> we are working at doing a pilot on something similar to this in kenya. to as a partnership with google. -- it is a partnership with google. if we want to get information about the ngo's that are doing certain projects, we cabled back out and have a meeting with different stakeholders and respond to us. we are trying to build up a platform for kenya where you can literally click on a map of kenya or specific provinces and figure out who is doing what. you can have that have something that serves the state department as well as the open public. is a difficult thing to do. i have had conversations with a variety of private companies who
want to do this for their own purposes. it is interesting to watch the conversation played out between government and private sector as to how we are exploring this in kenya. it will look like something in between what you and i are describing. you are absolutely right. emory slaughter is leading the s charge on a huge initiative. this is an outlook on how we joint development and diplomacy. a huge piece of this is how we address the kinds of questions that you raised it the short answer is, we are working on it. the administration understands technology as a tool for transparency and a mission -- and initiates -- and innovation. there is a new platform that can
be utilized by people who want to develop competitions for crowd source solutions to global challenges. we are getting creative. some of them will work and some of them won't. we are taking a 1000 flower approach to this. one thing i have seen in my four years of government is removal of the risk aversion that prevented us from getting creative as to how we troubleshoot these challenges. it is good ideas like yours and others in this room that we want to put on the table and they get the attention of some of the most senior foreign policy makers. [applause] >> we have a genuine synthetic crystal globe, appropriately showing ogilvy washington at the center.
thank you very much. >> i appreciated. it. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> president obama plans to meet with the arizona governor to talk about the arizona immigration law for that meeting is supposed to get away -- to
get underway at 1:00 eastern. the arizona governor should comment after the meeting and we will try to get that live to when it happens at about 1:30 eastern time. white house spokesman robert gibbs will brief reporters at3 live coverage is expected on c- span. secretary of state hillary clinton is meeting with her counterpart from indiaatoday. the two leaders will discuss u.s.-india relations. live coverage of those remarks will start at 1:15 eastern on our companion network, cspan 2. join us later for more from campaign 2010. south carolina is one of the state's looking to elect a new governor. earlier this week, we brought you a debate with republicans and today is the democrats' turn. the concerts under -- beckons underway at 7:00 p.m. eastern. -- thht gets under way at 7:00
p.m. eastern. >> i said this president was going to be impeached. this was eight weeks after the break-in. woodward said we could not use impeachment around the newsroom on less people think we have an agenda. awe of that moment stays with me. >> the search for watergate with the cspan video library. what would board and burns in a similar this year and see what other key players have said about the break-in and cover-up. export washington your way, the cspan lydia -- video library free online. >> live pictures of work on the bp oil spill in the gulf of mexico. engineers are hoping to cap the well today. earlier, they were using a special saw got stuck when they were attempting to cut a piece of broken pipe. engineers are expecting to lower a cap over the leak in the next couple of hours. you can see a link to this live
feed and our website at c- span.org. coast guard admiral thad allen briefed reporters on the latest response to the oil spill in the gulf. this is about 25 minutes. i have good news. >> we cut the riser pipe. they had to use the sheer cutters which is the ones they used to do the other riser pipe yesterday. the other saw we attempted to use was not successful we replaced it with the shares which do not have as a cut.
we next meet to put the containment cap over what is left of the riser pipe on the lower marine riser package and see if we can move gas and oil up the pipe and hopefully start clearing out gas and start production later today. we will give you updates throughout the day. a significant step toward at this point. the challenge is to seat about containment cap over it. to differentiate between wwat we're trying to do with the smooth, and now, we were going to put a solid steel with a cap and reduce the amount of oil that could leak around the connection. this is an regular cut and will be more challenging to get the seal around but we will have a containment device there that could capture more oil than we would otherwise be able to. we will see how effective it will be. we will have the option to use undersea disbursements to capture any oil that estates.
it will be a test as we move ahead. that is a significant step forward this morning. i am pleased to report that. a couple of updates -- i would be glad to answer some questions after that. i spent a good deal of time yesterday with lee said jackson, the epa administrator. she has been in the area and we are covering as much area as possible. she is a tremendous asset from a local area. she has existing relationships in many of the parish's and we have been working closely together. she has been following the disbursement issue. i can tell you that the epa has been doing a number of water testing. they are doing here quality testing associated with it. they have found no impact on the wildlife related to the toxicity of the departments but they continue to do that and we will work closely with them on this. we're also committed to using as little disbursement as we have to on the up surface and concentrate this under the water
reducing any potential impact on the surface. we have used a lot of disbursement out there. we are approaching the 1 million gallon mark. there are concerns about that. we will continue to work this issue very closely as we move forward. we also announced yesterday that we have approved the proposal from the state of louisiana to add five more segments on their request for five more army corps of engineers to deal with the oil spill from kip getting into the marshlands of louisiana. i have had several conversations about governor jindal about this and i will meet with him later today. regarding the current trajectory, the upper edge of the perimeter of the oil spill, this is a collection of spills. this is approaching the southern area of louisiana, mississippi,
florida. we have moved a large number of coast guard assets into the area including a coast guard endurance cutters that has helicopter capability that can do observance and control. we have positioned to hundred 25 buoy tinders and a number of patrol boats out there looking to support the vessel opportunity that we have been rolled their to deploy booms for oil patches offshore and do skimming operations. we will continue to focus on the mississippi-alabama area as long as the winds are out of the south. we continue to move boom into alabama and look at strategies to deal with the impact to mobile bay. i would be glad to take your questions. you always go first.
>> i am with cbs news radio. obviously, you have tried to catch this before and it has not work. how hard is it to put a containment cap over this pipe considering all the oil coming out and the occurrence? >> prior to the cut, they had suspended the content cap right over the area. does not like they have to move it in, it is a matter of moving down and seeding it. you have an inverted funnel that is wider. there is a rubber seal around it. this is not unlike the rubber seal you find inside a garden hose. we have to get that over and sit as good as it can understanding it is on a regular cut and they will do that for the next couple of hours.
>> [unintelligible] >> we have skimmer's all over. there are some in alabama and off louisiana but we'll give you an exact number later. the back to your first question? we had some extensive discussion yesterday with the administrator who was down there yesterday. she was meeting with research vessels. we have had reports about plume's under the water. we are in the process of taking samples and trying to figure out what they are. they are denser than the water but we're not sure of it is oil.
we are concerned about oil gathering under the water and going somewhere else. the disbursements generally make the oil separate and they would not gather together in a plume under the sea. we don't know if there is a commonality between the disbursements and the plans being reported. -- and theplumes being reported. we will put together a model of what we think is going on there. we're not finished the work yet. >> bp is running ads now promising they will make this right given the fact that just about everything that has been done has fallen short or failed, how much confidence do you have that bp will make this right? >> it is their duty to stand by
us. i have not seen the advertisement yet, but i am not sure -- i think we need to separate some things out. our applications of technology hopefully will contain the flow. we are using technology that normally works in oil well containment but have never been tried at 5,000 feet. the real issue is trying to do things where there is no human access at 5,000 feet. there are legitimate ways to deal with these problems that have never been done bbfore sometimes we just have to check and adapt. that is what has been happening here. they have a duty to the responsible parties. >> [unintelligible] >> they are both on target for
their date. bp produces a death to time charge. based on what they know, they will -- it will be harder to drill through rock then under a settlement.+ we get a daily update on that and they are slightly ahead of schedule. we're not willing to declare victory until the hoses are connected. -- the pipes are connected. it is mid-august for the relief well. that is the deadline. when that deep driller two was being deployed and we thought there was an opportunity to cap the well, one obstacle would be to put another blowout preventer over the one that is down there. we deployed one on the deep driller two. \ they went out and start the second relief well. when they started the top kill option and thought they could stabilize the pressure in the well with mud and a cement plug, they were prepared to put another presenter on top of it. the deep driller two stopped and
moved over and was ready to deploy should that be needed. it was not and they went back and resume drilling and they are still on schedule to complete their portion of drilling. yes? >> [unintelligible] >> we don't know exactly why the diamond saw . we conjectured that it encountered the drill pipe inside the riser pipe. if you're not holding onto it and you have pressure against you, you are just pushing it away and it wobbles iran. the conjecture was that the pipe was not stationer enough to put pressure on. they tried it for several hours and they said it would not be successful and they went to the second option. yes, ma'am? >> [unintelligible]
>> right. >> [unintelligible] >> i call it a looser fitting but it is still really tight. there's still a problem of oil interacting with seawater. the natural gas that is in part of the hydrocarbons is coming up and forms hydrates. that caused the first containment advice to become blent and float away. they have put ports into the top of the new ones where they can put methanol in to deal with the hydrate problem while the harbor -- hydrocarbons are coming up. they will also be putting in hoses to inject methanol to deal with the hybrid problem. >> [unintelligible]
>> we have lightning but when there is weather out there, small boats can operate safely we pushed a lot of resources down to of venice. we will always have to deal with weather. that is a huge factor in our ability to do burning or mechanical skinny. there are days, cannot do anything out there because the weather will not allow it. as we move into hurricane season, until the relief wells is done and the well is capped, we will still be at some risk of exposure to weather even if it is not a hurricane. heavier weather could force us to stop doing certain operations. we're working with british petroleum melanie series of alternatives that might make the operation more survivable in heavier whether including
bringing in larger platforms for the production of the oil brought in from containment advises -- containment devices. we need to face the possibility that a certain storm condition would make us stop the containment recovery operation and get the resources off their for safety purposes. we would have oil being discharged in that case. they are looking assistance where we could deploy disbursements to mitigate that but it is an issue we will have to mitigate day to day. >> british petroleum said last week that there was 11 alternatives . [unintelligible] what is the result of the discussion with government and
the british petroleum alternatives? [unintelligible] >> what is allowed for the epa for disbursement, we have had british petroleum provide information to the epa on alternatives but we have asked and to look at other solutions where if we looked at another disbursement, if there was enough to be used out there, this is not a closed issue. this remains under discussion. this material is available to us now and it is affected. we are most concerned about the total amount of disbursements that have been deployed to date and the impact sub-sea disbursements. right now, a legitimate alternntive is not a surface of debt. i continue to talk about this
with the epa. anybody else? let me take one more >> there was a concern that once that pipe was sheared off, there would be an increase in the flow of oil. are you seeing that? >> we will get more information out later today. we have video down there. we will try to get more information to you on that later. the estimation on our flow rate was hat they would estimate that this could be up to 20% more. we don't know that is the case. one final comment -- at our request, british petroleum had done a couple of things which demonstrates the good fit on their part. they have a number of the video feed available and they are offering a "technical briefs a dayn